Cowboys restructured Sean Lee's contract ***MERGED ***

bkight13 said:
it all rolls over if they can't find any players to improve

but your way has worked for 23 years...... keep it up
Click to expand...
There is literally no reason to more closely tie you to players if you don't have to. And you can open the space at anytime. Preserving flexibility is an asset. You would give away that felxibility for no real reason.

And what the hell do you mean my way for 23 years? What does that even mean? And this team hasn't had the same salary cap management philosophy for 23 years.

Please start making sense. Use your words.
 
FuzzyLumpkins said:
He also brought up Ware but we were not forced to cut Ware. He had been hurt the previous 2 years and despite a relatively healthy 2015 he has been hurt some last year again indicating they were not wrong in their calculus.
Click to expand...
Exactly ...Ware had a 12m base salary and 16m cap hit

He wouldn't reduce his salary even though he only had 6 sacks the year before
We cut him(not June 1st) and took a the full 9m dead money hit
If we just restructured him we would have saved more in cap space....his hit would've been 8m

He then took less, 10m, to go to DEN
 
Toruk_Makto said:
There is literally no reason to more closely tie you to players if you don't have to. And you can open the space at anytime. Preserving flexibility is an asset. You would give away that felxibility for no real reason.

And what the hell do you mean my way for 23 years? What does that even mean? And this team hasn't had the same salary cap management philosophy for 23 years.

Please start making sense. Use your words.
Click to expand...
I said for once ....just once try it my way

and just once try to pry that stick out.... you might just smile once
 
Idgit said:
As the cap options get better here after Tony's deal is off the books, it certainly looks more tempting. I don't think Dallas will be shying away from big signings, necessarily. But I still don't think they'll be active early in VFA.

They've got so much to offer, though, that they're an appealing target right now to quality defensive veterans if the money is close. The limelight, the facilities, the notoriety that comes with playing in Dallas is all appealing. The team is competitive and young. We won't shy away from taking a big risk I don't believe. I do think we won't pay a giant premium for anybody, though. Deals like the Olivier Vernon deal are off the table. A big, sensible deal for, say, Bennie Logan or a player of his ilk might not be.
Click to expand...
This is what i've been trying to reinforce over and over. Value does not mean cheap. Greg Hardy again proves this team will invest significant cap resources if it thinks the value is there. Then you have people putting together models only showing 2-4mm AAV deals which is just disingenious.

Then you have others like @bkight13 who literally make things up and thinks if we just restructure everyone for the fun of it suddenly we'll do things differently in free agency. Hint, we won't. Hint, all you do is give up flexibility to move on from players in a more palatable manner.

@bkight13 unders the theory of how the salary cap moves work...but doesn't have a coherent strategy as to how to manipulate it. His strategy is simply "restructure everyone." That's not a plan.
 
bkight13 said:
Exactly ...Ware had a 12m base salary and 16m cap hit

He wouldn't reduce his salary even though he only had 6 sacks the year before
We cut him(not June 1st) and took a the full 9m dead money hit
If we just restructured him we would have saved more in cap space....his hit would've been 8m

He then took less, 10m, to go to DEN
Click to expand...
We would have added 12mm to the cap. We didn't feel as though he was good value at 12mm so we moved on. His dead money didn't impact us from signing anyone we would have wanted.
 
The main issue people have with the cap is that if you do like they do in real life you start incurring interest. Anyone who deals with their personal finances knows that is a good way to get in over your head in debt particularly if you are pushing the boundaries of your budget.

If there was a 10% interest charge on borrowed money then the Cowboys would be idiots to do what they do. I understand why people emotionally and reflexively hate that Cowboys business model.

Thing is there is no interest and you can approach the accounting with an eye on future years so that you don't get in trouble.

The main thing that people should be worried about is extending Martin for 2019 and beyond. If you cannot make a case that what they are doing will jeopardize their ability to do that then your fear is meaningless to me.
 
Last edited:
bkight13 said:
I said for once ....just once try it my way

and just once try to pry that stick out.... you might just smile once
Click to expand...
Your way doesn't make sense. That is why literally no NFL team does it. There isn't one enterprising GM in all the league who "sees it your way?"

Strange. I wonder why.
 
Toruk_Makto said:
This is what i've been trying to reinforce over and over. Value does not mean cheap. Greg Hardy again proves this team will invest significant cap resources if it thinks the value is there. Then you have people putting together models only showing 2-4mm AAV deals which is just disingenious.

Then you have others like @bkight13 who literally make things up and thinks if we just restructure everyone for the fun of it suddenly we'll do things differently in free agency. Hint, we won't. Hint, all you do is give up flexibility to move on from players in a more palatable manner.

@bkight13 unders the theory of how the salary cap moves work...but doesn't have a coherent strategy as to how to manipulate it. His strategy is simply "restructure everyone." That's not a plan.
Click to expand...

Exactly. 'Value' and 'cheap' are not the same things. Every year there are very good players left in VFA after the feeding frenzy is over. We don't always sign any of them, but we usually start poking around at that point and see if we can get it done. This might be a season where we're a bit more aggressive at that stage. Next year, we almost certainly will be.
 
Toruk_Makto said:
Your way doesn't make sense. That is why literally no NFL team does it. There isn't one enterprising GM in all the league who "sees it your way?"

Strange. I wonder why.
Click to expand...
You say it doesn't work but it hasn't ever been done and you are afraid to try it
 
Toruk_Makto said:
This is what i've been trying to reinforce over and over. Value does not mean cheap. Greg Hardy again proves this team will invest significant cap resources if it thinks the value is there. Then you have people putting together models only showing 2-4mm AAV deals which is just disingenious.

Then you have others like @bkight13 who literally make things up and thinks if we just restructure everyone for the fun of it suddenly we'll do things differently in free agency. Hint, we won't. Hint, all you do is give up flexibility to move on from players in a more palatable manner.

@bkight13 unders the theory of how the salary cap moves work...but doesn't have a coherent strategy as to how to manipulate it. His strategy is simply "restructure everyone." That's not a plan.
Click to expand...
GHardy is an example of nothing .......we made no commitment to him, spent 8.8m and walked away

That is not how FA works

We gambled on a broken player and it didn't work....just like Melton
 
stasheroo said:
Well at least it gives them some room to talk to a player or two. I'd guess it's ticketed to keeping our own rather than signing someone else's.
Click to expand...

Most likely. If we decide to bring in any outside FAs, we'll probably restructure Dez's contract as well, unless we've done something with Romo at that point. This allows us to get last-minute deals done with our FAs without having to make any other moves. At $9 million, we have room for at least three to four signings, considering even the longer-term guys could be around $2 to $2.5 million the first year.
 
Kaiser said:
I would definitely not restructure Crawford but they can get to the same number by extending Witten instead.

Also I don't think they need that much space, its easier to just structure the contracts to have a small hit in 2017 with a much bigger hit in 2018.

Either way, I agree they have the cap space to do whatever they want.
Click to expand...

Crawford contract needs to be halved similar to what Free did few years ago.
 
AmericasTeam81 said:
So, has the sky stopped falling?
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
I'm not a big fan of the restructuring aka kicking the van down the road but this is Dallas preferred way of doing business so it is what it is.
 
Kaiser said:
I would definitely not restructure Crawford but they can get to the same number by extending Witten instead.

Also I don't think they need that much space, its easier to just structure the contracts to have a small hit in 2017 with a much bigger hit in 2018.

Either way, I agree they have the cap space to do whatever they want.
Click to expand...
The key as always is structure. They can sign players if they want to. The real question is not can they but will they
And while I expect a few new guys signed and some of our own, I don't expect the shopping list some here want
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 11 more.
Total: 1,479 (members: 111, guests: 1,368)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
466,181
Messages
13,921,314
Members
23,795
Latest member
Derekbsenior
Back
Top